| Literature DB >> 26377924 |
Tsair-Fwu Lee1,2, Shyh-An Yeh3,4,5, Pei-Ju Chao6,7, Liyun Chang8, Chien-Liang Chiu9,10, Hui-Min Ting11,12, Hung-Yu Wang13,14, Yu-Jie Huang15.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radiation-induced tinnitus is a side effect of radiotherapy in the inner ear for cancers of the head and neck. Effective dose constraints for protecting the cochlea are under-reported. The aim of this study is to determine the cochlea dose limitation to avoid causing tinnitus after head-and-neck cancer (HNC) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26377924 PMCID: PMC4574090 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-015-0501-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Characteristics of patients with head and neck cancer
| Value—x (%) | |
|---|---|
| HNC (n = 422) | |
| Age (y) | |
| Mean | 50 |
| Range | 26–73 |
| Gender ( | |
| Male | 381 (90.3 %) |
| Female | 41 (9.7 %) |
| Tumor site | |
| Larynx | 48 (11.4 %) |
| Hypopharynx | 68 (16.1 %) |
| Oropharynx | 54 (12.8 %) |
| Oral cavity | 102 (24.2 %) |
| Nasopharyngeal carcinoma | 150 (35.5 %) |
| AJCC stage | |
| I | 0 |
| II | 34 (8.1 %) |
| III | 95 (22.5 %) |
| IV | 293 (69.4 %) |
| Cochlea mean dose | |
| 1–10 | 43 (10.2 %) |
| 10–20 | 118 (28 %) |
| 20–30 | 139 (32.9 %) |
| 30–40 | 101 (23.9 %) |
| 40–50 | 15 (3.6 %) |
| 50–60 | 6 (1.4 %) |
| Tinnitus (grade 2+) | |
| Yes | 49 (11.6 %) |
| No | 373 (88.4 %) |
| Cochlea mean dose Gy (range) | 23.72 (1.73–58.83) |
| Without grade 2 + Tinnitus | 22.44 (1.73–50.26) |
| With grade 2 + Tinnitus | 33.46 (8.72–58.83) |
| Chemotherapy | |
| Yes | 150 (35.5 %) |
| No | 272 (64.5 %) |
Abbreviation: AJCC American Joint Committee on Cancer, HNC head and neck cancer
Fig. 1The fitted dose–response curves of the a logistic and b LKB NTCP models for the incidence of grade 2+ tinnitus. NTCP normal tissue complication probability, LKB Lyman-Kutcher-Burman
Normal tissue complication probability fitted parameters
| NTCP model |
| γ50 or |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Logistic | 46.31 (41.46–52.50) | 1.27 (1.02–1.55) | 33.62 (30.15–38.27) |
| LKB | 46.52 (41.91–53.43) | 0.35 (0.30–0.42) | 32.82 (29.58–37.69) |
Abbreviation: CI confidence interval, NTCP normal tissue complication probability, LKB Lyman-Kutcher-Burman, TD the dose predicting a 50 % risk of complications, TD the dose predicting a 20 % risk of complications, m a unitless LKB model parameter for describing the slope of the dose–response curve, γ a Logistic model parameter for normalized slope of the dose–response curve
The CIs were calculated by fixing one parameter at its best-fit value and allowing the other parameter to vary
System performance evaluation
| Logistic NTCP | LKB NTCP | |
|---|---|---|
| AUC | 0.76 (0.69–0.84) | 0.76 (0.69–0.84) |
| Brier (scaled) | 0.16 | 0.16 |
| Omnibus | P < 0.001 | P < 0.001 |
| HL test ( | 0.82 | 0.43 |
| NPV- | 0.90 | 0.90 |
| NPV- | 0.92 | 0.92 |
| AIC | 257.79 | 259.48 |
Abbreviation: NTCP normal tissue complication probability, LKB Lyman-Kutcher-Burman, NPV Negative predictive value, AUC Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, HL Hosmer–Lemeshow test, NPV negative predictive value, TD the dose predicting a 50 % risk of complications, TD the dose predicting a 20 % risk of complications, AIC Akaike’s information criterion
Bin sizes used for Hosmer–Lemeshow test were 15<, 15–25, 25–35, 35–45, >45 Gy (five bins)
Fig. 2Calibration curve of the predictive models for grade 2+ tinnitus using a logistic and b LKB NTCP. The plots show the relationship between estimated risk and real outcome. NTCP normal tissue complication probability, LKB Lyman-Kutcher-Burman. Bin size = 6 Gy